Rate this book

Defending Constantine: The Twilight Of An Empire And The Dawn Of Christendom (2010)

by Peter J. Leithart(Favorite Author)

4.11 of 5 Votes: 3

ISBN

0830827226 (ISBN13: 9780830827220)

languge

English

genre

History & Biography

publisher

InterVarsity Press

review 1: I used to be a fan of Leithart's writing. Even a few years ago when he openly attacked Reformed theology in *The Baptized Body,* his writing was cogent and impressive. Something happened between the writing of that book and the writing of this one. Admittedly, Leithart does accomplish a few useful ends in this book. I will list where he is strong and where is his is either wrong, misleading, of inadequate.Pros:1) Leithart does a good job handling the disciples of Yoder2) Leithart does a good job dealing with the secular scholarship that downplays the obvious persecution of Christians. I like Gibbon a lot, but Leithart ably rebuts him.3) There remains the fact of a Christian *polis,* and we see such in Constantine.4) He does a good job dismissing the silly nonsen... morese of Dan Brown.Cons:1) While I side with Leithart over Yoder, it cannot be denied that there was a seismic shift in the Church's praxis with the advent of Constantine.2) Further, there was a seismic shift in the church's eschatology. While some have challenged the ubiquity of premillennialism in the pre-Nicene church, it was there and its eschatology was forward-looking to the reign of Yahweh-in-Christ upon the earth. With the advent of a Christian Emperor over the known world, an emperor who was known as "Equal-to-the-Apostles" (which can still be heard in Eastern Orthodox litanies today), in whose person Empire and Sacras were united (cf Runciman, *The Byzantine Theocracy*), there is little point for the church to retain its premillennialism. Yoder and Moltmann capably document this. 2a) This is a tangential note: In *Against Christianity* Leithart attacks Eusebius for his postmillennial ethics centered in the Advent of Constantine, saying we should have a more Augustinian eschatology centered in the tension of already-not yet. Now Leithart writes a book where he tacitly endorses Eusebius' eschatology. One of them has to give.3) Constantine was a bad Christian, if I may not judge. I am willing to concede the point he was a Christian. I can even buy, for sake of argument, the miracle in the sky. But there are significant problems: 1) He put his family members to death (yes, I know it was realpolitik), 2) he postponed baptism based on very bad theology, and 3) He was not always friendly to Nicene Theology (yes, I realize he didn't understand it, which further underscores my point). These facts to not negate Leithart's thesis, but they remain tough pills to swallow.Conclusion:My criticisms notwithstanding, this probably is the best work on Constantine in modern times.
review 2: A great book to push back against the overly-popular ideas put forth by the likes of Yoder & Hauerwas. While much of the book is confronting Yoder on some glaring and under-noted inconsistencies, it goes beyond that to paint a picture of Constantine that puts him in proper historical and cultural context. Of course, Leithart covers a ton of ground, and therefore he doesn't take the methodical scholarly rout in crafting his arguments. This is a book that is doing battle. Reader be warned. less

Download links for: Defending Constantine: The Twilight of an Empire and the Dawn of Christendom

Advertising